Current and previous research, policy and awareness Projects

2011 - 2014: EUkids III at London School of Economics, Management Group, work package leader (dissemination) and national coordinator for Norway.See www.eukidsonline.net

2009 – 2011: Eukids II at London School of Economics, national coordinator for Norway. Sign up for newsletter

2006- 2011: Mediatized Stories at University of Oslo PhD Candidate. Funded by the Norwegian Research Council

2006 – 2009: Eukidsonline at London School of Economics, national coordinator and work package leader (WP1 “data availability”)

2004 – 2006: AwareU at Norwegian Media Authority. Project Director and Training coordinator for EU/EEA national awareness nodes (all sectors) in the field of Internet Safety. The project provided pan-European and regional awareness training and strategy development. Service provided on behalf of the European Commission Safer Internet Action Plan.

Staksrud, E., Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2007). What Do We Know About Children’s Use of Online Technologies? A Report on Data Availability and Research Gaps in Europe. London: EU Kids Online (Deliverable 1.1). Download this report

Staksrud, E., & Lobe, B. (2010). Evaluation of the Implementation of the Safer Social Networking Principles for the EU Part I: General Report. Luxembourg: European Commission under the Safer Internet Programme.

Lobe, B., & Staksrud, E. e. (2010). Evaluation of the Implementation of the Safer Social Networking Principles for the EU Part II: Testing of 20 Providers of Social Networking Services in Europe. Luxembourg: European Commission under the Safer Internet Programme.

Staksrud. (2012, 20.06.2012). Bullying and threats via Internet and social media: The perspective of European children. Presented for Ms Marta Santos Pais, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on Violence against Children, Sweden

Staksrud. (2011, 27.06). Bullying on the Internet: The perspective of European children. Paper presented at the Tackling violence in schools. High-Level Expert meeting co-organised by the government of Norway, the Council of Europe and the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence against Children, Oslo.

In an open-ended survey question to European 9- to 16-year-olds, some 10,000 children reported a range of risks that concern them on the internet. Pornography (named by 22% of children who mentioned risks), conduct risk such as cyber-bullying (19%) and violent content (18%) were at the top of children’s concerns. The priority given to violent content is noteworthy insofar as this receives less attention than sexual content or bullying in awareness-raising initiatives. Many children express shock and disgust on witnessing violent, aggressive or gory online content, especially that which graphically depicts realistic violence against vulnerable victims, including from the news. Video-sharing websites such as YouTube were primary sources of violent and pornographic content. The findings discussed in relation to children’s fear responses to screen media and the implications for the public policy agenda on internet safety are identified.

Research on the risks associated with children’s use of the internet often aim to inform policies of risk prevention. Yet paralleling the effort to map the nature extent of online risk is a growing unease that the goal of risk prevention tends support an over-protective, risk-averse culture that restricts the freedom of online exploration that society encourages for children in other spheres. It is central to adolescence that teenagers learn to anticipate and cope with risk - in short, to resilient. In this article, we inquire into children and teenagers’ responses after have experienced online content or contact risks. Pan-European findings show especially in Northern European countries with high internet access, parental perceptions of likelihood of online risk to their child is negatively associated with their perceived ability to cope. A comparison of representative surveys conducted among children in three relatively ‘high risk’ countries (Norway, Ireland and the United Kingdom) found that although the frequency of exposure to perceived risks, especially content risks, is fairly high, most children adopt positive (e.g. help from friends) or, more commonly, neutral (e.g. ignoring the experience) strategies to cope, although a minority exacerbate the risks (e.g. passing risky on to friends). Most strategies tend to exclude adult involvement. Significant differences in both risk and coping are found by gender and age across these countries, pointing to different styles of youthful risk management.

What is online risk? How can we best protect children from it? Who should be responsible for this protection? Is all protection good? Can Internet users trust the industry? These and other fundamental questions are discussed in this book. Beginning with the premise that the political and democratic processes in a society are affected by the way in which that society defines and perceives risks, Children in the Online World offers insights into the contemporary regulation of online risk for children (including teens), examining the questions of whether such regulation is legitimate and whether it does in fact result in the sacrifice of certain fundamental human rights. The book draws on representative studies with European children concerning their actual online risk experiences as well as an extensive review of regulatory rationales in the European Union, to contend that the institutions of the western European welfare states charged with protecting children have changed fundamentally, at the cost of the level of security that they provide. In consequence, children at once have more rights with regard to their personal decision making as digital consumers, yet fewer democratic rights to participation and protection as ’digital citizens’. A theoretically informed, yet empirically grounded study of the relationship between core democratic values and the duty to protect young people in the media-sphere, Children in the Online World will appeal to scholars and students across the social sciences with interests in new technologies, risk and the sociology of childhood and youth.

What is online risk? How can we best protect children from it? Who should be responsible for this protection? Is all protection good? Can Internet users trust the industry? These and other fundamental questions are discussed in this book. Beginning with the premise that the political and democratic processes in a society are affected by the way in which that society defines and perceives risks, Children in the Online World offers insights into the contemporary regulation of online risk for children (including teens), examining the questions of whether such regulation is legitimate and whether it does in fact result in the sacrifice of certain fundamental human rights. The book draws on representative studies with European children concerning their actual online risk experiences as well as an extensive review of regulatory rationales in the European Union, to contend that the institutions of the western European welfare states charged with protecting children have changed fundamentally, at the cost of the level of security that they provide. In consequence, children at once have more rights with regard to their personal decision making as digital consumers, yet fewer democratic rights to participation and protection as ‘digital citizens’. A theoretically informed, yet empirically grounded study of the relationship between core democratic values and the duty to protect young people in the media-sphere, Children in the Online World will appeal to scholars and students across the social sciences with interests in new technologies, risk and the sociology of childhood and youth.

In this report, we discuss how the original EU Kids Online analytical model was constructed. We review key findings produced from qualitative and quantitative research by EU Kids Online before discussing the rationale for a revised model that reflects the findings better and raises new questions for research. We conclude that future research should examine the following 12 research priorities: 1. Factors relating to children’s identity and resources, beyond demographic variables 2.New modes of access to the internet, as this becomes more mobile, personalised, pervasive. 3.A multidimensional analysis of digital skills and literacies and their significance for well-being. 4. A rethinking of the ‘ladder of opportunities’ to identify whether and when children undertake more ambitious creative or civic online activities. 5. New kinds of online risks including risks to their personal data, privacy issues and online reputation management. 6. The interplay between children’s digital practices and proprietary policies and mechanisms. 7. Children’s desire to experiment and transgress boundaries, to grasp children’s agency online. 8. Extending the analysis of how parents mediate their children’s internet use to the potential importance of other socialising agents. 9. Extending research on 9-to 16-year olds to much younger children’s use of digital media. 10. Research on sociotechnological innovations in smart/wearable/ubiquitous everyday devices. 11. The implications of digital engagement as it may reconfigure (undermine or enhance, alter or diversify) children’s wellbeing in the long term. 12. Relate the research agenda on children’s online access, risks and opportunities to the broader agenda of children’s rights – to provision, participation and protection – in the digital age.

Summary Nearly 10,000 children told us about what upsets them and their friends online. Their responses were diverse, revealing a long list of concerns. Pornography (named by 22% of children who told us of risks) and violent content (18%) top children’s online concerns. Overall, boys appear more bothered by violence than girls, while girls are more concerned with contact-related risks. Violence receives less public attention than sexual material, but many children are concerned about violent, aggressive or gory online content. They reveal shock and disgust on seeing cruelty, killings, abuse of animals and even the news – since much is real rather than fictional violence, this adds to the depth of children’s reactions. As children told us, video-sharing websites are often associated with violent and pornographic content, along with a range of other contentrelated risks. Among the children who linked risks to specific internet platforms, 32% mentioned video-sharing sites such as YouTube, followed by websites (29%), social networking sites (13%) and games (10%). Children’s mention of risks rises markedly from nine to 12 years old. Younger children are more concerned about content and other risks. As they get older they become more concerned about conduct and contact risks. These are linked in many children’s minds to the use of social networking sites such as Facebook. Concern about risks is higher among children from ‘high use, high risk’ countries. Policy implications are identified and discussed.

Summary Social networking sites (SNS) are popular among European children: 38% of 9-12 year olds and 77% of 13-16 year olds have a profile. Facebook is used by one third of 9-16 year old internet users. Age restrictions are only partially effective, although there are many differences by country and SNS. One in five 9-12 year olds have a Facebook profile, rising to over 4 in 10 in some countries. The report also shows that:  Younger children are more likely than older to have their profile ‘public’. A quarter of 9-12 year old SNS users have their profile ‘set to public’.  Parental rules for SNS use, when applied, are partly effective, especially for younger children.  A quarter of SNS users communicate online with people unconnected to their daily lives, including one fifth of 9-12 year old SNS users.  One fifth of children whose profile is public display their address and/or phone number, twice as many as for those with private profiles.  The features designed to protect children from other users if needed are not easily understood, by many younger and some older children.

Executive Summary • This report is a part of the European Commission’s commitment to and support of the self-regulatory initiative from social networks to implement “Safer Social Networking Principles” signed by 20 social networking companies in 2009.The report analyzes the 19 self-declarations1 submitted by the signatories of the Principles as well as 25 of the services offered among these companies in order to give an overview of the general level of implementation. All services have been tested in their original language version by a team of 13 national and two lead experts. • The report consists of two parts – the first part gives an overall analysis of findings across the services evaluated. The second part consists of individual testing reports for all SNSs that have signed the agreement. • Comparing the compliance between the Principles and what is reported in the selfdeclaration reports excellent compliance is found with eight SNSs, eight services have good compliance, five services have fair compliance, and one service has poor compliance. • On an overall level, the compliance between what is stated in the self-declaration reports against what is found on the services themselves is assessed with the following results: • Excellent compliance is found with two SNSs, ten services have good compliance, ten services have fair compliance, while no service is assessed as having poor compliance between the self-declaration and what was found on the service during testing. • Principle 3 (“empower users”) Principle 6 (“Encourage safe use approach to Privacy”) are the principles best implemented. Also Principle 1 (“Raise awareness”) has a high score on compliance. • Principle 2 (“Age-appropriate services”) and Principle 4 (“Easy to use mechanisms for reporting violations”) are assessed to be the principles where the compliance between what is stated in the self-declaration and what is observed on the service itself is the lowest, as the majority of services are assessed to be partially compliant. • Comparing the self-declaration reports with the services themselves, there is a general under-reporting on measures and tools available on the site. On the negative side this indicates that the self-declaration reports are incomplete; on the positive side more relevant safety measures are available to the ordinary user than stated by the SNSs.

What do we know about children and the Internet in Europe? The report provide a detailed analysis of original empirical research identified and coded in EU Kids Online’s online repository - 235 studies in all. It aims to inform policy-makers, practitioners and academics about the nature of the evidence base, research availability and the key gaps. Pressing gaps are identified regarding younger users, new kinds of risk, and mobile/new technologies, as well as a paucity of research in some countries.